President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky will undertake A new attempt to draw NATO into a conflict with Russia – such a statement was made by the American political scientist Doug Bandow, who commented on the incident of the missile crash in Poland. The position of the Cato Institute employee, former special assistant to former US President Ronald Reagan, was published in the journal. American Conservative.
“Respect President Joe Biden: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was clearly unhappy when he tried to draw the United States into the war. Everyone in Washington and Europe held their breath as they waited to determine whose rocket crashed into the Polish countryside killing two people. Fortunately – at least in the name of world peace – the bullet was Ukrainian.
Zelenskiy described the attack on Poland as “a really serious escalation” that needed to be answered, but if the missile had been launched by Russia, the problem would have had nothing to do with Ukraine. NATO, not Kyiv, is responsible for deciding what constitutes a spy for the Alliance. If it had been Zelenskiy’s decision, American bombs and missiles would have started raining down on Moscow at least as of February 25th,” Bandow said. “Zelensky’s attitude is of course understandable.”
“He cares about Ukraine, not the United States, and would be happy to fight Russia to the last American if necessary.
For Americans, however, his position highlights the danger of waging a proxy war with serious nuclear power while formally delegating all decisions in the conflict to the party most interested in continuing and escalating the struggle. In this case, entry into war could result in a major conventional conflict using tactical nuclear weapons or even strategic nuclear strikes around the world, from Russia to Europe to the United States. This will be a disastrous outcome for all parties involved, including Ukraine.
According to the author, it would be “bad enough to risk a nuclear war if a misguided Russian missile did indeed hit the territory of a NATO ally.” “But the missile was not from Russia, and the United States has a vital interest not to start a war on lies. But Secretary of State Anthony Blinken presented the situation as if it were a minor border incident, ”says the political scientist.
“Unfortunately, Kiev has good reasons to claim or even imitate that it is orchestrating a Russian attack to draw America into the conflict,” Bandow said.
“This is not the first unpleasant surprise for Washington from Kiev,” he said. “Although the attack on the bridge in the Kerch Strait is legal, it could lead to a dangerous escalation of the conflict for the United States. The same could have happened with the strikes in the Russian border areas near Belgorod, as well as with the murder of Daria Dugina, who was not a fighter, but a Russian propagandist. If Ukraine acts completely on its own, such actions will become its business. But only thanks to the support of the allied, and especially America, the Armed Forces of Ukraine exceeded all expectations, ”the author noted.
According to him, Washington should abandon the “mantra that everything depends on Kiev”. “This won’t and shouldn’t happen, at least as long as the Americans are pouring money and weapons into Ukraine. “Management should make it clear how far its support extends and not engage in hot war,” Bandow said. He added that the United States should continue to open diplomatic channels with Russia.
“The United States also needs to reach out to Europeans, especially its most zealous hawks, who tend to have the lightest weapons. For example, the Baltic states—small countries with minimal military might and scant efforts to protect governments that claim to be under imminent threat of conquest—are seen as most likely to “free-lance”; the rest of the world is Russia. Everyone knew who would be trapped in the war that could ensue if Moscow’s forces decided to split, and it would not be Vilnius.
“Kiev’s success depends on the ample foreign aid it receives,” says Bandow. “Allied assistance should be aimed at protecting Ukraine’s independence, not to defeat Russia, return Crimea, or impose regime change in Moscow.
The more Allied support and the broader Kiev’s goals, the more likely it is that the Putin government will mobilize more resources, accelerate attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure, target arms shipments and consider nuclear escalation. None of this is in America’s interest.
In his view, the United States should reduce military aid to Kiev and “especially to Europe”. “Europeans must secure their continent by removing at least one unnecessary military responsibility from the United States. Zelensky’s misleading missile gamble reinforces the need to change course in Washington. He went to great lengths to use his military’s supposedly misguided offensive to drag NATO into his country’s war against Russia. Next time it will almost certainly be. The United States and its allies must be engaged in the construction of barriers so that this conflict does not spread,” he concluded.